Comments on: UGC its rude, its wrong and it misses the point

By: Tom Scott

Tom Scott — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:23:00 +0000

@Nick – big publishers do tend to assume that the web revolves around them: people ‘generate content’ on their site, publishers create new groups on existing social networking sites rather than contributing to the existing conversation. There are some exceptions to this. It’s not helpful. I like the idea of considering the nature of the relationship – that makes a lot of sense.

By: Nick Booth

Nick Booth — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:46:41 +0000

When I hear journos or producer talking about UGC I want to wince. It is also tied with the idea of portals – get them to come to us and make our content for us.

It is much more important for mainstream publishers to be asking if they have relationships with their audience – if so what sort of relationship? Exploitative or collaborative. If the later you might have some surprising habits – like going where the audience is and sharing with them things that are useful to them.

By: Tom Scott

Tom Scott — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:30:18 +0000

Thanks Nick, Although it’s only a phrase, I do think that it’s death will open people’s eyes to new opportunities. To the benefit of both the amateur publisher and the traditional media companies etc.

By: nickreynoldsatwork

nickreynoldsatwork — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:28:29 +0000

Spot on Tom.

Death to the phrase “UGC”!

Amateur sportsmen and women go the Olympics. Do we look down on them just because it isn’t their day job